Angelina B. v. Ruben B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Angelina B. v. Ruben B.

62 A.D.3d 507, 877 N.Y.S.2d 897

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 14, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 62 A.D.3d 507 (Angelina B. v. Ruben B.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Angelina B. v. Ruben B., 62 A.D.3d 507, 877 N.Y.S.2d 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about December 19, 2007, which granted petitioner mother’s request for custody of the parties’ two children, with visitation privileges to respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The interests of these children will best be served by this custody arrangement with generous visitation privileges. The court’s conclusion to this effect was based upon a thoughtful assessment of all the evidence and a comprehensive evaluation of the witnesses and their testimony (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 173 [1982]), and has a sound and substantial basis in the record (Schneider v Schneider, 40 AD3d 956 [2007]). The court did not overlook or misconstrue material facts, or rely upon improper criteria, as respondent argues. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Nardelli, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about December 19, 2007, which granted petitioner mother’s request for custody of the parties’ two children, with visitation privileges to respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The interests of these children will best be served by this custody arrangement with generous visitation privileges. The court’s conclusion to this effect was based upon a thoughtful assessment of all the evidence and a comprehensive evaluation of the witnesses and their testimony (see Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 173 [1982]), and has a sound and substantial basis in the record (Schneider v Schneider, 40 AD3d 956 [2007]). The court did not overlook or misconstrue material facts, or rely upon improper criteria, as respondent argues. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Nardelli, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 507, 877 N.Y.S.2d 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/angelina-b-v-ruben-b-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack